Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repositori.uma.ac.id/handle/123456789/17252
Title: Analisis Yuridis Persekongkolan Tender Rehabilitasi Jalan dalam Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 14/KPPU.1/2018)
Other Titles: Juridical Analysis of Conspiracy for Road Rehabilitation Tenders in the Perspective of Business Competition Law (Case Study Decision Number 14/KPPU.1/2018)
Authors: Rangkuti, Abdul Hafiz
metadata.dc.contributor.advisor: Siregar, Taufik
Munawir, Zaini
Keywords: analisis yuridis;persekongkolan tender;perspektif hukum persaingan usaha;juridical analysis;tender conspiracy;business competition law perspective
Issue Date: 5-Jan-2022
Publisher: Universitas Medan Area
Series/Report no.: NPM;178400072
Abstract: Secara umum yang dikatakan bersekongkol adalah kerja sama yang dilakukan oleh pelaku usaha dengan pihak lain atas inisiatif siapapun dan dengan cara apapun dalam upaya memenangkan peserta tender. Munculnya Undang – Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 merupakan puncak dari berbagai upaya yang mengatur masalah persaingan antar pelaku usaha dan larangan melakukan praktik monopoli. Permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penulisan yaitu, bagaimana pengaturan mengenai persekongkolan tender menurut hukum persaingan usaha, bagaimana pembuktian mengenai persekongkolan tender dalam putusan nomor 14/KPPU.1/2018, bagaimana penerapan hukum persaingan usaha dalam putusan Nomor 14/KPPU.I/2018. Tujuan penelitian untuk mengetahui dan memahami bagaimana pengaturan mengenai persekongkolan tender menurut hokum persaingan usaha di Indonesia, untuk mengetahui dan memahami pembuktian persekongkolan tender serta untuk mengetahui dan memahami bagaimana penerapan hukum persaingan usaha dalam putusan Nomor 14/KPPU.I/2018. Manfaat penelitian secara teoritis untuk menambah pengetahuan hukum serta untuk menjadi bahan penelitian dalam bidang hukum perdata. Metode yang dipakai dalam penulisan ini adalah yuridis normatif yaitu metode penelitian yang mengkaji studi dokumen, yaitu dengan menggunakan berbagai data seperti perundang undangan, teori hukum keputusan pengadilan. Hasil penelitian yang ditulis dalam skripsi ini adalah Pengaturan mengenai persekongkolan tender ini diatur pada Pasal 22 UU No. 5 tahun 1999 serta diatur dalam Perkom No. 1 Tahun 2019, pembuktian mengenai persekongkolan tender dalam putusan nomor 14/KPPU.1/2018 adalah unsur unsur persekongkolan dalam Pasal 22 Undang Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999 terpenuhi dan berdasarkan alat bukti dala Pasal 45 Perkom No.1 Tahun 2019 terpenuhi, penerapan hukum persaingan usaha dalam putusan nomor 14/KPPU.1/2018 adalah dengan memberikan tindakan administratif berupa denda Menghukum Terlapor I dan II sebesar Rp1.769.000.000,00 yang harus disetor ke Kas Negara Kesimpulan pengaturan mengenai persekongkolan tender diatur pada Pasal 22 Undang Undang No.5 Tahun 1999 serta diatur dalam Perkom No. 1 Tahun 2019. pembuktian mengenai persekongkolan tender dalam Putusan Nomor 14/KPPU.1/2018 adalah unsur unsur persekongkolan dalam Pasal 22 Undang Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999 terpenuhi, penerapan hukum persaingan usaha dalam putusan nomor 14/KPPU.1/2018 memberi tindakan administratif berupa denda. In general, what is said to be conspiring is cooperation carried out by business actors with other parties at the initiative of anyone and in any way in an effort to win bidders. The emergence of Law Number 5 of 1999 is the culmination of various efforts to regulate the issue of competition between business actors and the prohibition of monopolistic practices. The problems raised in the writing are, how are the arrangements regarding tender conspiracy according to business competition law, how is the evidence regarding tender conspiracy in the decision number 14/KPPU.1/2018, how is the application of business competition law in the decision Number 14/KPPU.I/2018. The purpose of the research is to find out and understand how the regulation regarding tender conspiracy according to business competition law in Indonesia, to know and understand the proof of tender conspiracy as well as to know and understand how the application of business competition law in decision Number 14/KPPU.I/2018. The theoretical benefits of research are to increase legal knowledge as well as to become research material in the field of civil law. The method used in this paper is normative juridical, namely a research method that examines document studies, by using various data such as legislation, legal theory of court decisions. The result of the research written in this thesis is that the regulation regarding tender conspiracy is regulated in Article 22 of Law no. 5 of 1999 and regulated in Perkom No. 1 of 2019, evidence regarding tender conspiracy in decision number 14/KPPU.1/2018 is an element of conspiracy in article 22 of Law no. 5 of 1999 is fulfilled and based on the evidence in Article 45 of Perkom No.1 of 2019 is fulfilled, the application of business competition law in decision number 14/KPPU.1/2018 is to provide administrative action in the form of a fine to punish the Reported Party I and II in the amount of Rp.1,769,000. 000, which must be deposited into the State Treasury. The conclusion of the arrangement regarding tender conspiracy is regulated in Article 22 of Law No. 5 of 1999 and regulated in Perkom No. 1 of 2019. The evidence regarding tender conspiracy in decision number 14/KPPU.1/2018 is an element of conspiracy in article 22 of Law no. 5 of 1999 is fulfilled, the application of business competition law in decision number 14/KPPU.1/2018 provides administrative action in the form of a fine.
Description: 243 Halaman
URI: https://repositori.uma.ac.id/handle/123456789/17252
Appears in Collections:SP - Civil Law

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
178400072 - Abdul Hafiz Rangkuti - Fulltext.pdfCover, Abstract, Chapter I, II, III, V, Bibliography6.84 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
178400072 - Abdul Hafiz Rangkuti - Chapter IV.pdf
  Restricted Access
Chapter IV578.34 kBAdobe PDFView/Open Request a copy


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.